Systems and methods for document review, display and validation within a collaborative environment

ABSTRACT

Systems, methods, and media for controlling the review of documents. Methods may include receiving a request to review a document, responsive to the request, retrieving the document, the document including source content in an extensible markup language format, the document having a read-only access file permission, converting the document to read-write access file permission such that the source content is modifiable, receiving a modification of the source content of the document, incorporating the modification of the source content into the document to create a modified document, and automatically providing the modified document in a displayable format via the web-based interface.

CROSS-REFERENCE TO RELATED DISCLOSURE

This U.S. Nonprovisional Patent Application is a continuationapplication of U.S. Nonprovisional patent application Ser. No.16/737,892, filed Jan. 8, 2020, now granted U.S. Pat. No. 11,263,390issued on Mar. 1, 2022, entitled “Systems and Methods for InformationalDocument Review, Display and Validation,” which is a continuationapplication of U.S. Nonprovisional patent application Ser. No.15/938,288, filed Mar. 28, 2018, now granted U.S. Pat. No. 10,599,757issued on Mar. 24, 2020, entitled “Systems, Methods and Media forControlling the Review of a Document,” which in turn is a continuationapplication of U.S. Nonprovisional patent application Ser. No.13/217,122, filed Aug. 24, 2011, now granted U.S. Pat. No. 9,984,054,issued on May 29, 2018, entitled “Web Interface Including the Review andManipulation of a Web Document and Utilizing Permission Based Control.”This U.S. Nonprovisional Patent Application is also related to U.S.patent application Ser. No. 13/037,273 filed on Feb. 28, 2011, nowgranted U.S. Pat. No. 10,140,320, issued Nov. 27, 2018, and titled“Systems, Methods, and Media for Generating Analytical Data.” Thedisclosures of the aforementioned applications are incorporated byreference herein for all purposes, including all references andappendices cited therein.

FIELD OF THE TECHNOLOGY

The present technology relates generally to controlling the review ofdocuments, and more specifically, but not by way of limitation, tosystems, methods, and media for controlling the review of a document,for example, within a collaborative document review environment.

BACKGROUND

Informational documents are often created by document authors for avariety of purposes, such as explication of technical information (e.g.,user guides, F.A.Q.s, and so forth). The creation of informationaldocuments is often an iterative and review-intensive process. In manyinstances, the informational document author(s) may create informationaldocuments in a particular format such as portable document format, aword processing format, or other commonly utilized informationaldocument format.

SUMMARY OF THE TECHNOLOGY

According to some embodiments, the present technology is directed tomethods for controlling the review of a document. The methods mayinclude: (a) receiving a request to review a document; (b) responsive tothe request, retrieving the document, the document having a read-onlyaccess file permission; (c) converting the document to read-write accessfile permission such that the source content is modifiable; (d)receiving a modification of the source content of the document; and (e)incorporating the modification of the source content into the documentto create a modified document.

According to additional embodiments, the present disclosure is directedto systems for controlling the review of a document that may include:(a) a memory for storing executable instructions for controlling reviewof a document; and (b) a processor configured to execute theinstructions, the instructions including: (i) a display module that (1)receives requests to review documents that retrieves the document uponthe web-based interface receiving a request to review a document, thedocument including source content in an extensible markup languageformat, the document having a read-only access file permission and (2)converts the document to read-write access file permission such that thesource content is modifiable; and (ii) a review module communicativelycoupled with the display module that (1) receives a modification of thesource content of the document; and (2) incorporates the modification ofthe source content into the document to create a modified document.

According to other embodiments, the present disclosure is directed tonon-transitory computer readable storage media having a computer programembodied thereon, the computer program executable by a processor in acomputing system to perform a method for controlling review of adocument, the method comprising: (a) receiving a request to review adocument; (b) responsive to the request, retrieving the document, thedocument having a read-only access file permission; (c) converting thedocument to read-write access file permission such that the sourcecontent is modifiable; (d) receiving a modification of the sourcecontent of the document; and (e) incorporating the modification of thesource content into the document to create a modified document.

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

FIG. 1 is a schematic diagram of an exemplary architecture of a systemfor controlling the review of a document. The system may be utilized topractice aspects of the present technology.

FIG. 2 illustrates an exemplary review platform resident within acloud-based computing system.

FIG. 3 is an exemplary flowchart of a method for controlling the reviewof a document.

FIG. 4 is a block diagram of an exemplary computing system that may beutilized to practice aspects of the present disclosure.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF EXEMPLARY EMBODIMENTS

While this technology is susceptible of embodiment in many differentforms, there is shown in the drawings and will herein be described indetail several specific embodiments with the understanding that thepresent disclosure is to be considered as an exemplification of theprinciples of the technology and is not intended to limit the technologyto the embodiments illustrated.

Unfortunately, document reviewers (those that are tasked with reviewingand modifying these informational documents) may utilize one or moredifferent document rendering and/or editing programs relative to thedocument author(s) and/or one another. As such, the review process forinformational documents becomes cumbersome, as the informationaldocuments must be converted into a plurality of formats. Additionally,some document rendering programs only allow the end user to view, butnot modify the informational document. Therefore, any modification tothe informational document must be communicated via a program or processexternal to those utilized to create the informational document. Forexample, document reviewers often print out a hard copy of theinformational document and interlineate or annotate the informationaldocument. The document reviewer must then provide the interlineateddocument back to the author(s), where the interlineated information canbe incorporated into the document.

This process is only further complicated by a collaborative reviewprocess where multiple reviewers independently critique or modify theinformational documents. Common problems with collaborative reviewprocesses stem from many sources. For example, each of the reviewers maynot be aware of the modifications to the informational document beingcreated by the other reviewers, leading to duplicative or confusingmodifications to the informational content. Additionally, documentauthor(s) may need to review a plurality of versions of theinformational document before they can determine if the modificationsare potentially erroneous. These time-consuming and cumbersome stepscould be eliminated with the use of a centralized and controlleddocument review process, as described herein

Generally speaking, systems and methods provided herein may beconfigured to control the review of a document. More specifically,systems and methods provided herein may be configured to provide acontrolled, collaborative environment for creating, modifying, andreviewing informational documents. According to some embodiments,systems, methods, and media provided herein may be adapted to controlthe modification of documents within a collaborative review environment.

The systems may be implemented within a cloud-based computingenvironment and may include a common web-based interface. Individualclient nodes may interact with the systems via the web-based interfaceutilizing a web browser application. In some applications the systemincludes a review platform having an extensible language markup (“XML”)editor that allows individual or multiple client nodes to modify thesource content of informational documents.

It will be understood that while some of the embodiments describedherein may contemplate the utilization of XML format documents orapplications configured to edit or display XML format documents, one ofordinary skill in the art will appreciate that additional types ofdocument formats (e.g., .pdf, .doc, .txt, .html, .aspx, .xls, and soforth) may also likewise be utilized in accordance with the presenttechnology.

Broadly speaking, the review platform may include a what you see is whatyou get (“WYSIWYG”) web-based interface and XML editor that runs in theweb browser of a client node, such as an end user computing system. TheXML editor allows document reviewers to modify (e.g., edit, save,delete) the source content of informational documents. Theseinformational documents are stored in XML format and may be rendered todisplay the source content included in the XML structure.

The XML editor provides the document reviewer with an intuitiveinterface with which to edit the source content of the informationaldocument without requiring document reviewers to understand XMLformatting or XML schemas. Therefore, the XML editor may act similarlyto commonly utilized word processing applications. Stated otherwise, theXML editor may provide a centralized and easily accessible environmentthat allows document authors and reviewers to co-own, create, edit,review, and contribute to the creation of informational documents.

The XML editor may also be configured to apply XML schemas or extensiblelanguage markup schema definition (“XSD”) to the modified source contentto ensure that the modifications conform to the XML schema of thedocument, ensuring that the informational document remains consistentlyformatted for publishing.

As modifications are received and checked against the XSD, the modifiedsource content may be displayed as it would look if the modifieddocument were to be published as-is. The modifications may be tracked byincluding them as tentative changes (subject to third party approval),making the modifications visually distinct from the original sourcecontent, for example, by coloring, underlining, or other suitablemethods. Therefore, modifications to source content may be easilyapprehended by other document reviewers or the content author.

In some embodiments, modifications to informational documents may besubject to collaborative review. For example, one or more client nodesmay critique the modifications proposed by other client nodes before themodifications are incorporated into the source content of theinformational document. In some embodiments, the review platform mayutilize collaborative processes such as crowdsourcing to improve andrefine the source content of informational documents based upon thecollective knowledge of consumers or other end users.

Systems and methods provided herein may substantially reduce the need toconvert informational documents into a plurality of document formats(because client nodes may utilize a plurality of different documentediting and viewing applications) as the centralized web-based XMLeditor provides the informational documents in a viewable/editableformat that is rendered in the web browser of the client node.Therefore, the review platform may not be constrained by the formattinglimitations of third party word processing or document viewingapplications or programs.

Referring now to FIG. 1 , an architectural diagram of an exemplarysystem for controlling review of a document is depicted. The system 100is shown as including a cloud-based computing environment, hereinafter“cloud 105.” According to some embodiments, the cloud 105 may include aplurality of interconnected web servers 110 a-n.

Individual client nodes 115 are shown communicatively coupled with thecloud 105 via a network 120. It will be understood that the network 120may include a private or public network such as the Internet.

In general, a cloud-based computing environment is a resource thattypically combines the computational power of a large grouping ofprocessors (such as within servers 110 a-n) and/or that combines thestorage capacity of a large grouping of computer memories or storagedevices. For example, systems that provide a cloud resource may beutilized exclusively by their owners, such as Google® or Yahoo!®; orsuch systems may be accessible to outside users who deploy applicationswithin the computing infrastructure to obtain the benefit of largecomputational or storage resources.

The cloud may be formed, for example, by a network of web servers 110a-n with each server (or at least a plurality thereof) providingprocessor and/or storage resources. These servers may manage workloadsprovided by multiple users (e.g., cloud resource customers or otherusers). Typically, each user places workload demands upon the cloud thatvary in real-time, sometimes dramatically. The nature and extent ofthese variations typically depends on the type of business associatedwith the user.

In some embodiments, the cloud 105 may be configured to providecentralized and controlled environments for creating, modifying, andreviewing informational documents.

FIG. 2 illustrates an exemplary an authoring platform 200 that iscommunicatively coupled with a review platform 205 of the cloud 105. Insome embodiments, the review platform 205 may include a web-basedinterface 210, a display module 215, a review module 220, and avalidation module 225.

It is noteworthy that the review platform 205 may include additionalmodules, engines, or components, and still fall within the scope of thepresent technology. As used herein, the term “module” may also refer toany of an application-specific integrated circuit (ASIC), an electroniccircuit, a processor (shared, dedicated, or group) that executes one ormore software or firmware programs, a combinational logic circuit,and/or other suitable components that provide the describedfunctionality. In other embodiments, individual modules of the reviewplatform 205 may include separately configured web servers.

The authoring platform 200 may provide an additional platform fordocument authors to manage, edit, and release content for publishing tothe display module 215. As such, the authoring platform 200 may becommunicatively coupled with a storage media 230 that receives andretains informational documents created by document authors.

It will be understood the informational documents stored within thestorage media may have a read-only file access permission to preventunwanted changes to the documents. Once documents are created and madeavailable for review, content authors may notify document reviewers thatone or more informational documents are available for review viaelectronic mail or other methods.

It is noteworthy that the timelines on which the reviews are opened andclosed by content authors, and the type of document reviewer(s) who areallowed to perform various review functions may vary. For example,document authors may specify single day review periods, always openreview periods, subject-matter experts from within engineering to theopen community on the web, and so forth.

To review a document, document reviewers may communicatively couple tothe review platform 205 via the web-based interface 210 utilizing aclient node 115. The web-based interface 210 allows document reviewersto interact with and/or review informational documents. Documentreviewers may select informational documents, or portions ofinformational documents to review via the web-based interface 210.Selecting informational content via the web-based interface 210generates a request that is passed to the authoring platform 200.

The authoring platform 200 may then publish the informational documentto the web-based interface via the display module 215. Next, the webbrowser of the client node 115 renders the source content of theinformational document in a format that is perceivable to the documentreviewer.

It is noteworthy that although the display module 215 and the reviewmodule 220 have been disclosed as being two separate modules, theinclusion of the web-based interface 210 ensures a tight integration ofthe functionalities of the two modules together. Therefore, when thedocument reviewer accesses a document via the web-based interface 210,the display module 215 and review module 220 work together in a seamlessfashion to provide a review platform that resembles a conventional wordprocessing application.

Additionally, the display module 215 may provide the document reviewerwith powerful search capabilities. For example document reviewers maysearch for documents with simple searches to advance searches, or maysearch for specific content utilizing specific fields (e.g., imagetitles, and so forth). Additionally, the display module 215 may allowdocument authors to personalize their searches. For example, documentreviewers may have the ability to filter down the searched documentsbased on a set of user-defined or otherwise provided criteria thatallows the document reviewers to see only the documents they need.

Additionally, the display module 215 may function as a simple,easy-to-read, easy-to-navigate, and inter-linked search tool. In otherembodiments, documents may be browsed by keywords, index terms, or othertypes of navigational structures. In some applications, the displaymodule 215 may include graphic and media rich aids that make it easierfor document reviewers to use, understand, and utilize the reviewplatform 205.

The display module 215 receives the informational document from theauthoring platform 200 in read-write access file permission such thatmodifications may be made to the informational document. Modificationsto the document may be received by the review module 220 from inputreceived via the web-based interface 210. According to some embodiments,the review module 220 may include an XML editor 240 that functionssimilarly to a word processing application. Document reviewers mayutilize the XML editor 240 without need to learn the intricacies of theXML language or an appreciation of the XML structure or schema.Therefore, the informational content does not need to be converted intoa suitable document format that may be different from the documentformat of the original informational document.

In some embodiments, the review module 220 may include a simple,easy-to-read, and easy-to-navigate modification form that appearssubstantially the same as the read-only version of the document.Similarly to the display module 215, the review module 220 (or XMLeditor 240) may include rich media and graphical aids that make iteasier for an administrator or any other person tasked with configuringthe system to understand and utilize the XML editor 240. Additionally,such individuals may be allowed to configure how the XML editor 240behaves. For example, such individuals may configure the XML editor 240such that hitting enter in a paragraph creates a new paragraph withinthe document. In another example, hitting enter in a list creates a newlist item—but hitting enter twice may end the list and define thebeginning of a new paragraph.

For example, if the original informational document is created in XMLformat, the system does not need to convert the XML format document intomore commonly utilized document formats such as portable document format(“PDF”), document format (“DOC”), and so forth. Informational documentsthat are rendered by the web-based interface 210 may appear as aconventional word processing document instead of the more complicatedand abstract native XML format that was utilized by the document author.

According to some embodiments, document reviewers may be provideddocument review templates that provide the document reviewer with alimited subset of review functionalities based upon the technicalsophistication of individual document reviewers. For example, a documentreviewer having very little knowledge of the technical aspects of XMLcontent (such as, e.g., a marketing professional perhaps) may beprovided with a very simplified XML editor that looks very similar to aword processing program. More sophisticated reviewers (such as, e.g.,computer programmers) may be provided with a more technical and granularinterface that allows the reviewer to comment or review pseudo-code, oreven the underlying source code itself. As such, the web-based interface210 may advantageously be tailored to the sophistication level of theend user.

Modifications made to the source content of the informational documentvia the XML editor 240 may be evaluated by a validation module 225before the modifications are incorporated into the informationaldocument. In some embodiments, the validation module 225 may apply a XSDschema to the modifications to determine if the modifications conform tothe XSD schema. If the modifications do not conform to the XSD schema,they may be rejected. The review module 220 may generate a warning thatis displayed to the document reviewer that the proposed modificationdoes not conform to the XSD schema. One of ordinary skill in the artwith the present disclosure before them will appreciate that many typesof XML schema may likewise be utilized in accordance with the presenttechnology.

Assuming the modifications conform to the XSD schema of theinformational document, the modifications may be incorporated into thedocument to create a modified document. Once modifications have beenincorporated into the original document, the modified document becomesthe original document for purposes of a subsequent review. That is, themodified document may take the place of the original document. Thisprocess may happen iteratively as the document is further reviewed andmodified over time.

In some embodiments the modifications may be saved temporarily astentative changes. These tentative changes may be represented in avisually distinct manner relative to the original source content of theinformational document. For example, the modifications may be underlinedor colored such that they may be quickly and easily visually apprehendedby a document reviewer. Tentative changes may be incorporated into thedocument upon approval, as discussed in greater detail herein.

In other embodiments, modifications are incorporated without furtherreview. As such, upon a modification being incorporated into thedocument, the display module 215 may provide or “publish” the updateddocument to the web-based interface 210 such that the document reviewermay immediately or instantaneously review the modification. Thisinstantaneous, or essentially instantaneous, feedback provides thedocument reviewer with a visual representation of the incorporation of amodification to the informational document. As such, the documentreviewer may more easily appreciate the effect of a particularmodification on the final published appearance of the informationaldocument by reviewing the feedback.

It is envisioned that the document author may provide an informationaldocument to a plurality of document reviewers. The document reviewersmay collaboratively review the document, each independently (orcollaboratively) providing modifications or commentary relative to theinformational document.

In some applications, document reviewers may be the actual documentconsumer or end user. Document authors may publish the informationaldocument for review by a plurality of end users in a collaborativereview process that is often referred to as “crowdsourcing.” Rather than(or in addition to) utilizing resources within a company to reviewtechnical or informational documents, content authors may enlist theexpertise of their customers to refine and improve the informationaldocuments of the company. Because the end user may utilize the web-basedinterface 210 to provide commentary or review an informational document,web analytics may be gathered from the client device of the end userthat communicatively couples with the web-based interface 210. These webanalytics may be utilized to help the company or other entity tounderstand the demographics or interest of their end users, providingadditional benefit to both the end user and the company or entity. Webanalytics may be aggregated and evaluated according to methods such asthose disclosed in a corresponding U.S. patent application Ser. No.13/037,273 filed on Feb. 28, 2011 and titled “Systems, Methods, andMedia for Generating Analytical Data,” which is hereby incorporatedherein by reference in its entirety including all references citedtherein.

The web-based interface 210 may receive modifications from each of theplurality of document reviewers and may incorporate modifications to thedocument in different colors. Each color may be associated with adifferent document reviewer. Additionally, document reviewers maycritique or comment on the modifications of other document reviewers. Itwill be understood that these types of review processes may be utilizedto determine inconsistencies in informational documents, or may beutilized as a quality control process.

In some exemplary embodiments, consensus regarding modifications may beobtained from the plurality of document reviewers before themodifications may be incorporated into the document. In some instances,a subset of document reviewers may be utilized to filter or approvemodifications. In other embodiments, document reviewers may be permittedto vote on the appropriateness of a modification before incorporation ofthe same into the document to create a modified document.

In short, the review platform 205 may provide mechanisms for dynamicdocument review processes that are controlled (only allowing a documentto have its file access permission changed to read-write upon requestfrom an approved document reviewer) and allows for collaborative review.

In other embodiments, document authors may approve or rejectmodifications to the document. In these embodiments, the document authormay utilize the web-based interface 210 and select one or more of themodifications. The document author may accept or reject themodifications. Accepted modifications may be incorporated into thedocument to create a modified document.

It will be understood that document reviewers may be granted privilegeswithin the review platform 205 by the system administrators and/ordocument authors. These privileges may be determined by department(document authors v. engineers) or as a document review project movesthrough different stages. For example, such stages may include “openreview” stages where engineers modify the source content, and “closedreview” stages where only document authors may review and/or modifyinformational documents.

In some embodiments, the review platform 205 may include an analyticsmodule 235 that may track the behavior of document reviewers todetermine metrics such as informational documents with the highestnumber of modifications (connotes poorly authored documents or confusingsource content), what types of modifications are being made todocuments, how different communities of document reviewers modifydocuments, and so forth. Reports or other statistical data may beprovided to content authors via the analytics module 235.

As stated previously, the review platform 205 may be adapted toassociate modifications or commentary with individual documentreviewers. As such, by clicking on (or otherwise selecting) themodification or comment, a document author (or other document reviewer)may determine information corresponding to the individual (orindividuals) that provided the comment or modification. The informationcorresponding to the individual may include a name, an email address,social media identification, or other identifying information thatallows the individual document reviewer to be contacted directly formore immediate feedback. Individual comments or modifications may betagged with information that corresponds to the document reviewer thatprovided the commentary or modification.

In some applications, the review module 205 may be configured to retaina breadcrumb trail, thread, or other similar comment artifact of eachchange made to the informational document, or commentary relating to thedocument. An exemplary breadcrumb trail may include a navigation aidthat visually portrays iterations of the document. For example, thedates of modifications may be listed in chronological order with a glyph(symbol) between adjacent dates. Historical information may assist thedocument author in creating documents that are more closely aligned withthe interests or desires of the document consumer.

Document authors or document reviewers may be allowed to closeindividual comment threads or feedback loops to resolve particularissues relative to a document. As such, the analytics module 235 of thereview platform 205 may also monitor the status of review, commentary,or critiques of documents to determine outstanding issues relative to adocument (e.g., issues that have not been closed). For example, severaldocument reviewers may have questioned the use of a particular phrasewithin a document. In some illustrative embodiments, if the contentauthor has not responded to the commentary, it may be assumed that thedocument reviewer is not considering the commentary, or is notresponding to issues in a timely manner. According to some embodiments,the analytics module 235 may generate graphs or charts of issues orcritiques that have been opened, closed, reviewed, and so forth, withina particular period of time.

In summation, the flow of data begins when a request for a document isreceived by the review platform, namely by the display module 215.Documents corresponding to the request are obtained from the authoringplatform 200 by the display module 215. Before the documents arecommunicated from the authoring platform 200 to the display module 215,the authoring platform 200 converts the document from read-only fileaccess permission to read-write access file permission.

The display module communicates the document to the review platform 220.Modifications are received by, and incorporated into the document viathe review platform 220. To be sure, modifications may include edits,comments, changes, or other similar data. The review platform 220updates the document with the modifications to create a modifieddocument. The review platform 220 then communicates the modifieddocument back to the display module 215 where the modified document maybe provided in a displayable format or communicated back to theauthoring platform 200.

After receiving the modified document from the display module 215, theauthoring platform 200 then converts the modified document back toread-only file access permission before storing in a storage media.

In keeping with some embodiments according to the present technology,FIG. 3 illustrates a flowchart of an exemplary method 300 forcontrolling the review of a document. The method 300 may begin with astep 305 of a document author creating a document that is saved within astorage media. It will be understood that the document may be savedhaving a read-only file access permission to prevent unwanted changes tothe document. It will further be understood that the document has a XMLformat, in this example, and includes source content that defines thesubject matter of the document. Moreover, the document remains in XMLformat during each step of the method from storage to display tomodification and finally back to storage. As such, this exemplary methodadvantageously allows for review and modification of documents withoutthe need to convert the document into discrepant formats.

The method may include the step 310 of receiving a request to review adocument from a client node via the web-based interface. The request maybe generated from a document reviewer selecting a document, or a portionof a document.

Next, responsive to the request, the method may include the step 315 ofretrieving the document from the storage media. It is noteworthy thatthe storage media may be communicatively coupled with (or reside within)a cloud-based computing system.

After retrieval, the method may include the step 320 of converting thedocument to read-write access file permission such that the sourcecontent is modifiable, along with a step 325 of providing the documentin a displayable format via a web-based interface.

The converting of the document to read-write access file permissionfunctions similarly to opening a document in a word processingapplication, in some embodiments. Advantageously, the document reviewermay comment, edit, delete, add, or otherwise modify the source contentof the document all without the need to understand the intricacies andcode structure of the XML document format.

If the document reviewer modifies the document, the method may include astep 330 of receiving a modification of the source content of thedocument and a step 335 of incorporating the modification of the sourcecontent into the document to create a modified document.

Because the platform provided herein may utilize WYSIWYG processes fordocument review, the method 300 may include the step 340 ofautomatically providing the modified document in a displayable formatvia the web-based interface. Feedback or modifications to the documentare made immediately available to the document reviewer. In somemethods, modifications may be displayed in a visually distinct format byunderlining and/or coloring the modifications to delineate them from theoriginal source content of the document.

According to some embodiments, the method 300 may include a step 345 ofreviewing modifications before the modified or reviewed document isconverted back to read-only file access permission. The step 345 ofreviewing modifications may be performed by the original documentauthor, the document reviewer, a plurality of document reviewers, or viacrowdsourcing. Reviewing modifications may include approving orrejecting modifications to the document, in whole or in part. It will beunderstood that the step 345 of reviewing modifications may occur beforethe step 335 of incorporating the modification of the source contentinto the document to create a modified document.

Once the modified document has been reviewed the method 300 may includea step 350 of converting the modified document back to read-only fileaccess permission. The modified document may again be stored in thestorage media associated with the cloud-based computing system.

FIG. 4 illustrates an exemplary computing system 400 that may be used toimplement an embodiment of the present technology. The computing system400 of FIG. 4 includes one or more processors 410 and main memory 420.Main memory 420 stores, in part, instructions and data for execution byprocessor 410. Main memory 420 can store the executable code when thesystem 400 is in operation. The system 400 of FIG. 4 may further includea mass storage device 430, portable storage 440, output devices 450,user input devices 460, a graphics display 440, and other peripherals480.

The components shown in FIG. 4 are depicted as being connected via asingle bus 490. The components may be connected through one or more datatransport means. Processor 410 and main memory 420 may be connected viaa local microprocessor bus, and the mass storage device 430, peripherals480, portable storage device 440, and display system 470 may beconnected via one or more input/output (I/O) buses.

Mass storage device 430, which may be implemented with a magnetic diskdrive or an optical disk drive, is a non-volatile storage device forstoring data and instructions for use by processor 410. Mass storagedevice 430 can store the system software for implementing embodiments ofthe present technology for purposes of loading that software into mainmemory 420.

Portable storage device 440 operates in conjunction with a portablenon-volatile storage media, such as a floppy disk, compact disk orDigital Video Disc, to input and output data and code to and from thecomputing system 400 of FIG. 4 . The system software for implementingembodiments of the present technology may be stored on such a portablemedia and input to the computer system 400 via the portable storagedevice 440.

Input devices 460 provide a portion of a user interface. Input devices460 may include an alphanumeric keypad, such as a keyboard, forinputting alphanumeric and other information, or a pointing device, suchas a mouse, a trackball, stylus, or cursor direction keys. Additionally,the system 400 as shown in FIG. 4 includes output devices 450. Suitableoutput devices include speakers, printers, network interfaces, andmonitors.

Display system 470 may include a liquid crystal display (LCD) or othersuitable display device. Display system 470 receives textual andgraphical information, and processes the information for output to thedisplay device.

Peripherals 480 may include any type of computer support device to addadditional functionality to the computer system. Peripherals 480 mayinclude a modem or a router.

The components contained in the computer system 400 of FIG. 4 are thosetypically found in computer systems that may be suitable for use withembodiments of the present technology and are intended to represent abroad category of such computer components that are well known in theart. Thus, the computer system 400 of FIG. 4 can be a personal computer,hand held computing system, telephone, mobile computing system,workstation, server, minicomputer, mainframe computer, or any othercomputing system. The computer can also include different busconfigurations, networked platforms, multi-processor platforms, etc.Various operating systems can be used including UNIX, Linux, Windows,Macintosh OS, Palm OS, and other suitable operating systems.

Some of the above-described functions may be composed of instructionsthat are stored on storage media (e.g., computer-readable media). Theinstructions may be retrieved and executed by the processor. Someexamples of storage media are memory devices, tapes, disks, and thelike. The instructions are operational when executed by the processor todirect the processor to operate in accord with the technology. Thoseskilled in the art are familiar with instructions, processor(s), andstorage media.

It is noteworthy that any hardware platform suitable for performing theprocessing described herein is suitable for use with the technology. Theterms “computer-readable storage media” and “computer-readable storagemedia” as used herein refer to any media or media that participate inproviding instructions to a CPU for execution. Such media can take manyforms, including, but not limited to, non-volatile media, volatile mediaand transmission media. Non-volatile media include, for example, opticalor magnetic disks, such as a fixed disk. Volatile media include dynamicmemory, such as system RAM. Transmission media include coaxial cables,copper wire and fiber optics, among others, including the wires thatcomprise one embodiment of a bus. Transmission media can also take theform of acoustic or light waves, such as those generated during radiofrequency (RF) and infrared (IR) data communications. Common forms ofcomputer-readable media include, for example, a floppy disk, a flexibledisk, a hard disk, magnetic tape, any other magnetic media, a CD-ROMdisk, digital video disc (DVD), any other optical media, any otherphysical media with patterns of marks or holes, a RAM, a PROM, an EPROM,an EEPROM, a FLASHEPROM, any other memory chip or data exchange adapter,a carrier wave, or any other media from which a computer can read.

Various forms of computer-readable media may be involved in carrying oneor more sequences of one or more instructions to a CPU for execution. Abus carries the data to system RAM, from which a CPU retrieves andexecutes the instructions. The instructions received by system RAM canoptionally be stored on a fixed disk either before or after execution bya CPU.

It is noteworthy that various modules and engines may be located indifferent places in various embodiments. Modules and engines mentionedherein can be stored as software, firmware, hardware, as a combination,or in various other ways. It is contemplated that various modules andengines can be removed or included in other suitable locations besidesthose locations specifically disclosed herein. In various embodiments,additional modules and engines can be included in the exemplaryembodiments described herein.

The above description is illustrative and not restrictive. Manyvariations of the technology will become apparent to those of skill inthe art upon review of this disclosure. The scope of the technologyshould, therefore, be determined not with reference to the abovedescription, but instead should be determined with reference to theappended claims along with their full scope of equivalents.

What is claimed is:
 1. A method for controlling review of a document,the method comprising: receiving a request to review a document;responsive to the request, retrieving the document, the document havinga read-only access file permission; converting the document toread-write access file permission such that source content ismodifiable; receiving two or more modifications of the source content ofthe document from two or more users; incorporating the two or moremodifications of the source content into the document to create amodified document; creating a navigation aid that visually portraysiterations of the document from the two or more modifications that arelisted in chronological order with a glyph between adjacent dates of thetwo or more modifications; and providing the modified document such thata document reviewer may immediately or instantaneously review the two ormore modifications of the source content being incorporated into thedocument.
 2. The method according to claim 1, wherein the documentincluding the source content is in an extensible markup language format,the method further comprising: evaluating the two or more modificationsmade to the source content of the document via an extensible markuplanguage editor before the two or more modifications are incorporatedinto the document; applying an extensible markup language schemadefinition to the two or more modifications; rejecting the two or moremodifications if the two or more modifications do not conform to theextensible markup language schema definition; and generating a warningthat is displayed to the document reviewer if the two or moremodifications do not conform to the extensible markup language schemadefinition.
 3. The method according to claim 1, wherein the request isreceived via a web-based interface.
 4. The method according to claim 3,further comprising providing the document in a displayable format viathe web-based interface.
 5. The method according to claim 1, furthercomprising automatically providing the modified document in adisplayable format to a web-based interface, after the step ofincorporating.
 6. The method according to claim 4, wherein providing thedocument in a displayable format includes publishing the document as aweb page accessible via the web-based interface.
 7. The method accordingto claim 2, wherein the two or more modifications of the source contentis received via a web-based extensible markup language editor associatedwith a web-based interface.
 8. The method according to claim 1, furthercomprising displaying the two or more modifications of the sourcecontent of the document as tentative changes until receiving permissionto incorporate the two or more modifications, the tentative changesbeing visually distinctive from the source content.
 9. The methodaccording to claim 8, wherein receiving permission includes: receivingfeedback from a plurality of client nodes responsive to receiving thetwo or more modifications of the source content of the document; and atleast one of approving and rejecting incorporation of the two or moremodifications of the source content into the document based upon thefeedback.
 10. The method according to claim 1, further comprisingvalidating the received two or more modifications before the step ofincorporating.
 11. The method according to claim 1, further comprisingconverting the modified document back to read-only access filepermission and storing the modified document in a storage media.
 12. Asystem for controlling review of a document, the system comprising: amemory for storing executable instructions for controlling review of adocument; and a processor configured to execute the instructions, theinstructions including: a display module that (a) receives a request toreview a document and that retrieves the document upon a web-basedinterface receiving the request to review the document, the documentincluding source content in an extensible markup language format, thedocument having a read-only access file permission; (b) converts thedocument to read-write access file permission such that the sourcecontent is modifiable; and (c) provides the updated document to theweb-based interface such that a document reviewer may immediately orinstantaneously review two or more modifications of the source contentbeing incorporated into the document; a review module communicativelycoupled with the display module that (a) receives the two or moremodifications of the source content of the document from two or moreusers; (b) incorporates the two or more modifications of the sourcecontent into the document to create a modified document; and (c) createsa navigation aid that visually portrays iterations of the document fromthe two or more modifications that are listed in chronological orderwith a glyph between adjacent dates; and the review module furthercomprising a validation module that evaluates the two or moremodifications made to the source content of the document before the twoor more modifications are incorporated into the document.
 13. The systemaccording to claim 12, further comprising an authoring platform thatpublishes the document to the display module communicatively coupled tothe authoring platform, the display module providing the source contentas a web page via the web-based interface.
 14. The system according toclaim 13, wherein the authoring platform is communicatively coupled withthe review module, and the authoring platform receives the modifieddocument from the review module and converts the modified document backto read-only file permission.
 15. The system according to claim 14,wherein the authoring platform stores the modified document in a storagemedia communicatively coupled with the authoring platform.
 16. Thesystem according to claim 12, wherein the display module provides themodified document to the web-based interface as a web page.
 17. Thesystem according to claim 12, wherein the review module furthercomprises a web-based extensible markup language editor.
 18. The systemaccording to claim 17, wherein the web-based extensible markup languageeditor receives the two or more modifications of the source content fromat least one of a plurality of client nodes via the web-based interface,wherein the web-based extensible markup language editor is associatedwith the web-based interface.
 19. The system according to claim 18,wherein the review module saves the two or more modifications of thesource content of the document as tentative changes until the reviewmodule receives permission to incorporate the two or more modificationsfrom the at least one of the plurality of client nodes, the tentativechanges being visually distinctive from the source content.
 20. Thesystem according to claim 19, wherein the review module (a) receivesfeedback from a plurality of client nodes responsive to receiving thetwo or more modifications of the source content of the document; and (b)at least one of permits and rejects incorporation of the two or moremodifications of the source content into the document based upon thefeedback.